The 10 Most Important Differences Between Native and Cross-Platform Application Programming

The main difference between Native and Cross-Platform applications in terms of programming languages used lies in the diversity and specificity of languages for each type of development.

Programming languages used in Native applications

Programming languages used in iOS:

Native apps for iOS typically use Swift or Objective-C. Swift is the most modern and preferred programming language for iOS because it is safer in dealing with non-existent values (nil), in addition to being faster at times compared to Objective-C.

Programming Languages used in Android:

To develop native apps for Android, Kotlin or Java is usually used. Kotlin has become the language of choice for Android development due to its ease, readability, writing, and high efficiency, in addition to its full support from Google.

Languages used in Cross-Platform applications

React Native:

It uses JavaScript, a prevalent and well-known programming language among web developers, making it easy to transition into app development for those with web experience.

Flutter:

It uses Dart, a programming language developed by Google that provides an advanced programming model and strong graphical interface support, allowing cross-platform applications to be developed with performance that is very close to native.

Xamarin:

It uses C#, a general-purpose programming language that provides a rich set of programming features, and allows the development of applications that run on many platforms with extensive code sharing between them.

The difference in performance between Native and Cross-Platform applications is an essential aspect to consider when choosing the right development strategy for your project. Each approach has advantages and disadvantages that affect the application's speed, responsiveness, and ultimate user experience. Here's a breakdown of the key performance differences:

Direct access to device resources:

• Native: It has direct and unlimited access to device resources and APIs, allowing it to make the most of the hardware and provide better performance, especially in heavy graphics processing and gaming.
• Cross-Platform: Cross-Platform applications rely on an intermediary layer to communicate with device resources, which can result in slight response delays and poorer performance on resource-intensive tasks.

Responsiveness and smooth experience:

• Native: Thanks to deep integration with the operating system, Native delivers fast responsiveness and a smooth user experience, with faster data loading and smoother screen transitions.
• Cross-Platform: You may face some challenges in maintaining the same smoothness and responsiveness as native apps, especially in complex apps or those with multiple UI interactions.

Memory and processor consumption:

• Native: Tends to consume less memory and processor resources compared to its Cross-Platform counterpart, due to the improvements possible when using development languages and tools specific to each platform.
• Cross-Platform: This may consume more memory and put more strain on the processor due to the intermediate layers needed to translate code into instructions that the target platform can understand.

(UX) is a critical element in the success of any mobile app, and the difference between Native and Cross-Platform can have a huge impact on this experience. Here are some key aspects that show how each approach affects the user experience:

Responsiveness and performance:

Native:

It has high performance and fast response because it is specially designed to run on the target operating system. This means a smoother user experience with fast page loading and almost instant interactions.

Cross-Platform:

While Cross-Platform applications offer advantages such as speed of development and portability between platforms, using a middleware layer to communicate with the device may result in a less responsive user experience compared to Native, especially in complex applications or those that require significant system resources.

Integration with the device:

Native:

It can take full advantage of the device's features and peripherals, such as camera, gyroscope, contact list, etc., providing a rich and integrated user experience.

Cross-Platform:

Some applications may find it difficult to access certain device-specific features or may take longer to fully integrate these features, affecting the ability to provide a similar user experience.

Compatibility and consistency between platforms:

Native:

It means creating separate applications for each platform, which allows a unique user experience to be designed for each but may lead to inconsistency in the user experience across different platforms.

Cross-Platform:

Cross-Platform applications provide greater consistency in user experience across all platforms since they use a single code base, but this may come at the cost of not being able to improve the user experience.

The difference between Native and Cross-Platform performance in terms of compatibility and updates depends largely on how each type of application manages changes in the operating systems and target devices. Here's a detailed look at each:

Native:

• Advantages: Native is designed to work with the specific operating system and target hardware, providing high compatibility and enhanced user experience. Developers can use the latest operating system features as they become available.
• Challenges: Updating Native to ensure compatibility with each new version of the operating system can require significant effort, especially when dealing with multiple platforms (iOS and Android), where each application must be updated separately.

Cross-Platform:

• Advantages: These applications use a single code base to work on multiple platforms, making it easier to maintain compatibility across different devices and operating systems. This reduces the effort and time needed to manage updates and compatibility.
• Challenges: Cross-platform applications may experience delays in supporting the latest operating system features because they depend on software frameworks that need to be updated to support these features. You may also encounter difficulties in dealing with operating system updates that directly affect performance or functionality.

The difference between Native and Cross-Platform programming in terms of access to device features is mainly the ability to exploit basic device functions and resources, such as the camera, gyroscope, GPS, etc. Here's how each approach affects this ability:

Native applications

• Direct Access: Native has direct, unrestricted access to device functions and APIs. This means that it can exploit the full capabilities of the device and deliver optimal performance when using these features.
• Advanced feature usage: With direct access to device functions, developers can implement complex and fully customized features, providing a rich and unique user experience.
• Instant updates: Native apps can take advantage of the latest operating system and device features as soon as they are available, allowing for continuous app updates and improvement capabilities.

Cross-platform applications

• Indirect access: Cross-platform applications rely on an intermediary layer (such as a framework) to access device functionality, which may limit their ability to fully exploit all features or sometimes lead to less efficient performance.
• Challenges in advanced use of features: Some Cross-Platform applications may find it difficult to implement certain features with the same degree of customization or efficiency as Native, especially if those features rely heavily on device-specific capabilities.
• Delayed support for new features: There may be a delay in support for new device and operating system features in Cross-Platform applications, due to the need to update the software frameworks used in development to include these features.

Scalability is a critical feature of any software project, determining how easy it will be to add new features, expand functionality, or accommodate a larger number of users in the future. The difference between them in terms of scalability can greatly influence the choice of the most appropriate approach for your project. Here's how each approach affects scalability:

Native development

Advantages:

Improved Performance: Since Native is built for specific platforms, it has optimal performance and can handle a larger workload with greater efficiency.

Support for platform features: Native apps can take advantage of the latest features and updates offered by platforms, making it easier to expand functionality in line with device and operating system developments.

Challenges:

Cost and Resources: Extending Native means developing and maintaining separate versions for each platform, requiring more time and resources.

Development complexity: Extending functionality may be more complex due to the need for expertise in different development languages and tools for each platform.

Cross-platform development

Advantages:

Resource efficiency: Cross-platform applications can scale more resources efficiently, due to the use of a unified code base that works across multiple platforms.

Speed of development and expansion: Adding new features or expanding functionality can be done faster, as modifications are made in one code base and the change is reflected on all platforms.

Challenges:

Performance and Integration Limitations: Cross-platform applications may experience limitations in performance or deep integration with native platform features, which can impact scalability when trying to deliver a complex user experience.

Ease of development is one of the main factors that influence the decision to choose between Native and Cross-Platform applications. Each approach has its own advantages and challenges that affect the efficiency and speed of the development process. Here's a detailed look at the ease of development for both approaches:

Native

Advantages:

• Improved Performance: Since Native is developed for specific platforms, it provides better performance, making it easier to develop smooth and advanced user experiences.
• Full support for device features: Native has unrestricted access to API and device features, making it easy to integrate advanced functionality.

Challenges:

• Resource Requirements: Native development requires multiple development teams with specific skills for each platform (iOS/Android), which increases cost and effort.
• Development time: Building separate applications for each platform can result in an increase in the overall project timeline.

Cross-platform applications

Advantages:

• Resource Efficiency: Cross-platform development allows the code base to be shared across different platforms, reducing the need for specialized development teams and saving costs.
• Speed of release: Since development is done across multiple platforms using a single code base, the product can be released faster compared to Native development.

Challenges:

• Performance limitations and feature access: Cross-platform applications may experience limitations in performance and access to some device-specific features due to reliance on intermediary frameworks.
• Dependence on frameworks: Updates and maintenance depend on the support of the frameworks used, which may affect the application's ability to stay up to date with the latest device and platform features.

Maintainability is a critical part of the software development life cycle, and includes software updates, correcting errors, and adding new features. The difference between Native and Cross-Platform applications can significantly impact maintenance efforts and costs. Here's how each approach affects maintainability:

Native

Challenges:

• Double the effort: Since Native requires separate development and maintenance for each platform (such as iOS and Android), it requires double the effort to update and maintain each version of the app.
• Specialized resources: Specialized developers are required for each platform, which increases the overall cost of maintenance and requires greater coordination between teams.

Advantages:

• Complete control: Native provides complete control over functionality and performance, making it easier to track and debug errors more effectively.
• Fast updates for new features: Native can be updated quickly to take advantage of the latest operating system features as they become available.

Cross-platform applications

Advantages:

• Maintenance efficiency: Thanks to the use of a single code base, Cross-Platform applications can be updated and maintained more efficiently, reducing the efforts and costs associated with maintenance.
• Uniformity: A unified code base makes it easier to track and correct errors across all platforms, providing a consistent user experience.

Challenges:

Reliance on frameworks: Maintainability depends on the frameworks used, which can lead to delays in providing updates or patching if these frameworks do not support new platform features quickly.

Cost is the first factor that influences the decision of developers and companies when choosing between Native and Cross-Platform development for applications. Each approach has a different impact on the overall project budget, depending on several factors such as the cost of development, maintenance, and long-term upgrades. Here's a detailed look at how each option affects the cost:

Native development

• Initial cost: Native development can be more expensive in the early stages compared to cross-platform development. This is due to the need to develop the application separately for each platform (such as iOS and Android), which requires different teams with specific expertise in platform-specific programming languages and development tools.
• Cost of maintenance and updates: The cost of maintaining and managing updates for native applications can also be high, due to the need to apply updates separately on each platform.

Cross-Platform Development 

• Initial cost: Cross-Platform development is less expensive initially compared to Native development, as the code is written once and can be deployed on multiple platforms. This reduces the need for specialized development teams for each platform and reduces development time.
• Cost of Maintenance and Updates: The cost of maintaining and managing updates is usually lower in Cross-Platform applications compared to Native, as changes can be applied to a single code base and deployed across all platforms effectively.
• Deciding factors to choose between Native and Cross-Platform
• Target Audience: If your target users primarily use a specific platform (iOS or Android), it may be beneficial to focus on developing a native app for that platform to provide the best possible experience.
• Budget: Native development requires a larger budget due to the need to develop separate applications for each platform, while Cross-Platform development can be more cost-efficient due to the use of a unified code base.
• Project timeline: If time is of the essence, Cross-Platform development provides a faster path to market since the app can be released on multiple platforms at the same time.
• Performance and Functionality Requirements: Applications that require high performance and extensive use of native device features may benefit more from Native development. Cross-platform development may be sufficient for applications that do not need to fully exploit the capabilities of the device.

In conclusion, Cross-Platform has greater flexibility in management and development thanks to the possibility of using a unified code base to run the application on several platforms (such as iOS and Android), which reduces the time and resources needed for development and maintenance. This makes it an attractive option for businesses with limited budgets or those seeking to quickly launch their applications to market.

Security is a key consideration in mobile app development, and the difference between Native and Cross-Platform development can impact how security standards and procedures are addressed and implemented. Each approach has its advantages and challenges in terms of security:

Native Development 

Advantages:

Fine-grained control: Provides more granular control over device functions and security features, allowing specific security measures to be applied to each platform.

Rapid security updates: They can be updated quickly to take advantage of the latest security features offered by platforms, helping protect them from new vulnerabilities.

Challenges:

Duplicate effort: Maintaining security standards across Native may require additional effort and resources, as security measures must be implemented and maintained separately for each platform.

Cross-platform development

Advantages:

Standardized security measures: Standardized security measures can be easily applied across all platforms, ensuring a secure user experience regardless of device or platform.

Challenges:

• Reliance on frameworks: Cross-platform applications may rely on frameworks to provide security functionality, which may result in delays in receiving security updates or responding to new vulnerabilities.
• Framework limitations: Some frameworks may not support the latest security features or advanced protection techniques available for native applications, which limits the application's ability to defend against new security threats.